Answer:
The answer is 1.142
Step-by-step explanation:
and by the way you could have just used a calculator:)
Answer:
1.734
Step-by-step explanation:
Given that:
A local trucking company fitted a regression to relate the travel time (days) of its shipments as a function of the distance traveled (miles).
The fitted regression is Time = −7.126 + .0214 Distance
Based on a sample size n = 20
And an Estimated standard error of the slope = 0.0053
the critical value for a right-tailed test to see if the slope is positive, using ∝ = 0.05 can be computed as follows:
Let's determine the degree of freedom df = n - 1
the degree of freedom df = 20 - 2
the degree of freedom df = 18
At the level of significance ∝ = 0.05 and degree of freedom df = 18
For a right tailed test t, the critical value from the t table is :
1.734
If we let x as candy A
y as candy B
a as dark chocolate in candy a
b as dark chocolate in candy b
c as caramel
d as walnut
P as profit
we have the equations:
a + c = x
2b + d = y
a + 2b ≤ 360
c ≤ 430
d ≤ 210
P = 285x + 260y
This is an optimization problem which involves linear programming. It can be solved by graphical method or by algebraic solution.
P = 285(a + c) + 260(2b +d)
If we assume a = b
Then a = 120, 2b = 240
P = 285(120 + 120) + 260(240 + 120)
P = 162000
candy A should be = 240
candy B should be = 360
The answer is 10 cm
Imagine cement cover as a rectangle which volume is 660,000,000 cm3. So this rectangle has width (w = 60m), length (l = 110m), and height (h = ?). The height of the rectangle is actually a thickness of the cement layer. So, we will use the formula for the volume (V) of the rectangle to calculate the thickness:
V = w · l · h
It is given:
V = 660,000,000 cm³
w = 60 m = 60 · 100 cm = 6,000 cm
l = 110 m = 110 · 100 cm = 11,000 cm
h = ?
Using the formula: V = w · l · h
660,000,000 = 6,000 · 11,000 · h
660,000,000 = 66,000,000 · h
⇒ h = 660,000,000 ÷ 66,000,000 = 10 cm
From the Histogram displaying the the estimated monthly salaries of company employees with different years of experience, the graph might be misleading given that:
The scale on the y-axis overemphasizes the difference in salaries between different experience levels.
It might not be the case always that salary increment is proportional to experience, this might not fit all the cases.